Tweet
ARMAN MELIKYAN: "DISCRIMINATION INADMISSIBLE"
Karine Karapetyan Interviewed
DeFacto Agency, Armenia
March 30 2006
March 23-24 an international scientific-practical conference titled
"Stability Models in the Black Sea - Caucasus Region" initiated by
Free Europe Foundation that became the continuation of a forum held
in Geneva at the end of last year titled "Multiculturalism and Ethno
Political models of the XXI Century" was conducted in Sochi. The
Sochi conference's principal goal was to determine democratic and
internationally recognized bases of the stability models' formation.
The issue of applicability of the Kosovo settlement's experience
in the context of the conflicts in Abkhazia, the South Ossetia,
Nagorno Karabakh and Pridnestrovie was discussed at the conference
as a separate subject.
The delegations of Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, Serbia, Georgia, Armenia,
Nagorno Karabakh, the South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Pridnestrovie and
Kosovo participated in the conference. The NKR President's Foreign
Policy Advisor Arman Melikyan and the NKR President's Assistant David
Babayan represented the Nagorno Karabakh Republic.
Arman Melikyan told DE FACTO about the conference's details.
- In my opinion, the idea of such a conference's convocation
testifies to the fact that Russia has finally decided to regulate its
foreign policy in the South, including the Caucasus. The problems of
unrecognized states, as well as various issues referring to security
sphere, relations between unrecognized states and, provisionally
speaking, their former parent states were discussed in the course
of the conferences initiated by Free Europe Foundation in Geneva and
Sochi. All the issues were also considered in the context of Russia's
foreign policy. The Russian party was interested in our vision of
Russia's role in the conflicts' settlement, which testified to the
search for new approaches and new ideas. Besides, there was interest
in discussing outlooks of settlement of the situation in Kosovo in the
context of an approach voiced by President Putin concerning universal
nature of the Kosovo settlement model. We have always said that any
conflict is unique. From the viewpoint the Kosovo approach can hardly
be applied to other conflicts. And yet, unless independence of Kosovo
is recognized, should we deny our independence then?
- According to the mass media information, representatives of
Azerbaijan turned down an invitation having learned about the Karabakh
experts' participation.
- The Caucasian Institute for Democracy Development Foundation Vice
President Midhat Sadekov took part in the conference. I do not know
whether he can be considered a representative of Azerbaijan. The
Sadekov's report was a sort of compilation of the Azeri politicians'
approaches to the Nagorno Karabakh issue, though it was reserved
enough.
- What is your opinion concerning a communique published on the
meeting's results?
- It is a text, which mainly reflects the organizers' opinion. We
expressed principal disagreement over a number of issues, in part,
on an item referring to the necessity of observing sane balance
between the principle of territorial integrity and the nations'
right to self-determination. It is absurd to speak about sane balance
in the context of the present realities. The thing is that in the
course of all the conflicts the former parental states used force,
which is criminal. In any state a conflict breaks out as a result of
the authorities' inability to prevent from the conflict situation,
which ought to be resolved by political means. March of history
is irreversible, and Azerbaijan will have to be tolerant to change
of realities that have also been caused by the Azeri authorities'
incapacity. At present Azerbaijan does not have legal or moral
arguments to state Nagorno Karabakh can become a part of Azerbaijan.
We have chosen our way of independent development and we'll go on
adhering to it, especially taking into consideration that the threat
to our citizens' life is deepening. Nowadays Azerbaijan does not speak
about peace; it speaks only about a war. The country's leadership
has actually deprived itself of possibility of searching for peaceful
decisions. So I think the search for the issue's political settlement
is very complicated both for the conflict parties and the mediators.
- In the report made at the forum you criticize the mediators'
approaches. Do you consider their approaches to the Karabakh issue
settlement to be blind-alley?
-It is criticism of the approaches being voiced not only by the OSCE
Minsk group, but various international NGOs as well. Such approaches
deprive the Armenians of the former Azeri SSR of the possibility to
search for justice anywhere. About 500 000 people are just excluded
from the negotiation process. And yet, the people's fate, their
perished relatives, lost property is not discussed at all. The issue
is simply not in the negotiations' agenda. Hundreds of thousands of
Azeris that have left their homes due to initiation of hostilities
against Nagorno Karabakh by Azerbaijan are present instead. We have
repeatedly stated that we consider the Azeris (about 25-30 thousand
of them), which used to live on the territory, within the frames
of which the NKR has been formed, to be our potential citizens. If
they recognize their citizenship and wish to return to Karabakh, they
may construct their lives equally to all the NKR citizens. However,
it cannot concern those hundreds of thousand of people who left with
the retreating Azeri troops from the territories, which are under
our jurisdiction today. Their considerable part participated in the
military operations against the NKR. Then the territorial fighting
units were formed in the territories adjoining our borders.
It is impossible to speak about the Azeris that have become internally
displaced persons without resolving the Armenian refugees' problems. I
believe there is some discrimination, asymmetry in the approach.
- In your report you also state the necessity of compensation
of material and moral losses caused to the Armenian refugees and
consider granting the territories presently controlled by the NKR in
their property as a compensation resource. Which mechanisms can be
applied here?
- There are accepted economical mechanisms. I believe in case
Azerbaijan refuses to make compensation to the Armenian refugees -
former citizens of the Azeri SSR - our state may have the right to
grant land to them at the expense of the territories we control at
present. It is a just approach. We will have to precisely formalize
our sovereignty over the territories, for presently only the Nagorno
Karabakh Republic can guarantee safe residence there.
I think the legal issue should be widely discussed. And yet it is
not just the issue of compensation. The territories controlled by
the NKR are a security zone. The world practice has witnessed a lot
of cases of the kind. For instance, in avoidance of Germany's world
aggression in the future a number of territories were separated from it
after the World War II. The conception may be applied to Azerbaijan,
especially in the context of bloating military budget being declared
and continuous militarist statements. Military rhetoric presumes an
adequate reply.
In my opinion, Azerbaijan's consent to get a dialogue under way with
Karabakh will be a real step in the direction of settlement. Until
Azerbaijan has granted its consent, its actions are just imitation, and
we should be aware of the fact. We cannot always wait for Azerbaijan
to decide that it is time to talk with Karabakh. Hundreds of thousands
of our compatriots living in the CIS territory are deprived of any
legal status today. By the way, neither Armenia nor Karabakh has made
a point of them. I consider we should devote attention to them and
carry on consecutive work to achieve the aim.
Karine Karapetyan Interviewed
DeFacto Agency, Armenia
March 30 2006
March 23-24 an international scientific-practical conference titled
"Stability Models in the Black Sea - Caucasus Region" initiated by
Free Europe Foundation that became the continuation of a forum held
in Geneva at the end of last year titled "Multiculturalism and Ethno
Political models of the XXI Century" was conducted in Sochi. The
Sochi conference's principal goal was to determine democratic and
internationally recognized bases of the stability models' formation.
The issue of applicability of the Kosovo settlement's experience
in the context of the conflicts in Abkhazia, the South Ossetia,
Nagorno Karabakh and Pridnestrovie was discussed at the conference
as a separate subject.
The delegations of Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, Serbia, Georgia, Armenia,
Nagorno Karabakh, the South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Pridnestrovie and
Kosovo participated in the conference. The NKR President's Foreign
Policy Advisor Arman Melikyan and the NKR President's Assistant David
Babayan represented the Nagorno Karabakh Republic.
Arman Melikyan told DE FACTO about the conference's details.
- In my opinion, the idea of such a conference's convocation
testifies to the fact that Russia has finally decided to regulate its
foreign policy in the South, including the Caucasus. The problems of
unrecognized states, as well as various issues referring to security
sphere, relations between unrecognized states and, provisionally
speaking, their former parent states were discussed in the course
of the conferences initiated by Free Europe Foundation in Geneva and
Sochi. All the issues were also considered in the context of Russia's
foreign policy. The Russian party was interested in our vision of
Russia's role in the conflicts' settlement, which testified to the
search for new approaches and new ideas. Besides, there was interest
in discussing outlooks of settlement of the situation in Kosovo in the
context of an approach voiced by President Putin concerning universal
nature of the Kosovo settlement model. We have always said that any
conflict is unique. From the viewpoint the Kosovo approach can hardly
be applied to other conflicts. And yet, unless independence of Kosovo
is recognized, should we deny our independence then?
- According to the mass media information, representatives of
Azerbaijan turned down an invitation having learned about the Karabakh
experts' participation.
- The Caucasian Institute for Democracy Development Foundation Vice
President Midhat Sadekov took part in the conference. I do not know
whether he can be considered a representative of Azerbaijan. The
Sadekov's report was a sort of compilation of the Azeri politicians'
approaches to the Nagorno Karabakh issue, though it was reserved
enough.
- What is your opinion concerning a communique published on the
meeting's results?
- It is a text, which mainly reflects the organizers' opinion. We
expressed principal disagreement over a number of issues, in part,
on an item referring to the necessity of observing sane balance
between the principle of territorial integrity and the nations'
right to self-determination. It is absurd to speak about sane balance
in the context of the present realities. The thing is that in the
course of all the conflicts the former parental states used force,
which is criminal. In any state a conflict breaks out as a result of
the authorities' inability to prevent from the conflict situation,
which ought to be resolved by political means. March of history
is irreversible, and Azerbaijan will have to be tolerant to change
of realities that have also been caused by the Azeri authorities'
incapacity. At present Azerbaijan does not have legal or moral
arguments to state Nagorno Karabakh can become a part of Azerbaijan.
We have chosen our way of independent development and we'll go on
adhering to it, especially taking into consideration that the threat
to our citizens' life is deepening. Nowadays Azerbaijan does not speak
about peace; it speaks only about a war. The country's leadership
has actually deprived itself of possibility of searching for peaceful
decisions. So I think the search for the issue's political settlement
is very complicated both for the conflict parties and the mediators.
- In the report made at the forum you criticize the mediators'
approaches. Do you consider their approaches to the Karabakh issue
settlement to be blind-alley?
-It is criticism of the approaches being voiced not only by the OSCE
Minsk group, but various international NGOs as well. Such approaches
deprive the Armenians of the former Azeri SSR of the possibility to
search for justice anywhere. About 500 000 people are just excluded
from the negotiation process. And yet, the people's fate, their
perished relatives, lost property is not discussed at all. The issue
is simply not in the negotiations' agenda. Hundreds of thousands of
Azeris that have left their homes due to initiation of hostilities
against Nagorno Karabakh by Azerbaijan are present instead. We have
repeatedly stated that we consider the Azeris (about 25-30 thousand
of them), which used to live on the territory, within the frames
of which the NKR has been formed, to be our potential citizens. If
they recognize their citizenship and wish to return to Karabakh, they
may construct their lives equally to all the NKR citizens. However,
it cannot concern those hundreds of thousand of people who left with
the retreating Azeri troops from the territories, which are under
our jurisdiction today. Their considerable part participated in the
military operations against the NKR. Then the territorial fighting
units were formed in the territories adjoining our borders.
It is impossible to speak about the Azeris that have become internally
displaced persons without resolving the Armenian refugees' problems. I
believe there is some discrimination, asymmetry in the approach.
- In your report you also state the necessity of compensation
of material and moral losses caused to the Armenian refugees and
consider granting the territories presently controlled by the NKR in
their property as a compensation resource. Which mechanisms can be
applied here?
- There are accepted economical mechanisms. I believe in case
Azerbaijan refuses to make compensation to the Armenian refugees -
former citizens of the Azeri SSR - our state may have the right to
grant land to them at the expense of the territories we control at
present. It is a just approach. We will have to precisely formalize
our sovereignty over the territories, for presently only the Nagorno
Karabakh Republic can guarantee safe residence there.
I think the legal issue should be widely discussed. And yet it is
not just the issue of compensation. The territories controlled by
the NKR are a security zone. The world practice has witnessed a lot
of cases of the kind. For instance, in avoidance of Germany's world
aggression in the future a number of territories were separated from it
after the World War II. The conception may be applied to Azerbaijan,
especially in the context of bloating military budget being declared
and continuous militarist statements. Military rhetoric presumes an
adequate reply.
In my opinion, Azerbaijan's consent to get a dialogue under way with
Karabakh will be a real step in the direction of settlement. Until
Azerbaijan has granted its consent, its actions are just imitation, and
we should be aware of the fact. We cannot always wait for Azerbaijan
to decide that it is time to talk with Karabakh. Hundreds of thousands
of our compatriots living in the CIS territory are deprived of any
legal status today. By the way, neither Armenia nor Karabakh has made
a point of them. I consider we should devote attention to them and
carry on consecutive work to achieve the aim.